Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Comic Books >

Gordon Lee and the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund

imaginary friend on the phone

18:32 / 07.12.05

Has anyone else been following this?

Last year, Gordon Lee of Legends comic books in Rome Georgia was arrested for accidentally giving away an issue of Alternative Comics #2 to a minor, which contained three pages of nudity deemed obscene by the state. Gordon was charged with distributing obscene material to minors, the Comic Book Legal Defnse Fund came to his aide and raised, to date, over $20,000 to help Lee's cause. All well and good, protecting Lee's consitutional rights.
But...
In doing a little bit of research for an assignment in my Media Law class, I came upon an older case involving Lee and the exact same claims. Seems Lee went through this all once before, back in 1991, after selling two porographic comics to a minor. His property was raided and materials sezied but, because of a legal loop-hole, none of the confiscated materials were allowed to be used in court.
Seems to me that Lee isn't really deserving of all of this attention, as he was caught once before and escaped through a hole in the law. In my eyes, he's less of an underdog defending his rights to free speech as he is a shady business man supplying questionable material. Don't get me wrong. I don't think that the comic in question if obscene, though it would be considered so under Georgia law. I just think that Lee isn't as innocent as the CBLDF would like him to appear.
Does anyone else know anything else about these cases? Any other opinions?

20:15 / 07.12.05

The hard part with Rome, Georgia and Georgia obscenity laws is that it's tough to tell whether Lee is being shaken down for having adults comics or whether he's intentionally doling them out to children. Hard to say.

I'm not as familiar with the 91 case as I'd like to be, but I do know that at one point it was settled for a $250 fine and that he had to fight to get some comics back that were seized but never ever used in the obscenity trial. Would like to know more about that particular case if you have any links handy, imaginary friend.

In this more recent case it would seem that a copy of this particular indy comic, Alternative Comics #2, featuring a nude Pablo Picasso ended up in a stack of 3000 or so freebie comics on Free Comic Book Day.

Beyond the nudity, there was no other lewdness in the comic, no sexual acts or depictions of anything of the kind (this is my understanding of the content despite not being able to get a hand on the issue in question). But the parents or county DA felt that Lee was disseminating pornographic material to a minor and thusly charged him under obscenity laws.

More on the story can be found here.

They'd have an easier time of proving it violates the so-called Miller test if it did depict actual sexual acts. As it stands, it can easily be protected under artistic merit.

Again, I can't tell if Lee is just playing fast and loose with the law or whether the DA just has it in for him. In a small town like Rome, Georgia it could be any of the above.

imaginary friend on the phone

23:36 / 07.12.05

All the info I can find on the 91 case is here.

Lexis Nexis

Lee's Lawyer's are trying to use the Miller test as a means to prove that the comic isn't obscene. Lee's problem is that the test is applied by the supreme court, and this case is under Georgia law, which makes it a criminal act to distribute any material to minors containing any nudity whatsoever. So, under state law, Lee looks guilty.